surplus labor value

confiscation means by force, under capitalism all relationships are entered into freely and voluntarily!! Theses are basics.

- - - Updated - - -

owners make production possible with contribution of management capital land etc. 1+1=12

- - - Updated - - -

obviously if true China would not be producing 100 times more under capitalism than socialism. Busted!! Sorry

 

100% absurd since there was no capitalism in Ireland at the time:
wiki:
The proximate cause of famine was Phytophthora infestans, a potato disease commonly known as potato blight,[6] which ravaged potato crops throughout Europe during the 1840s. However, the impact in Ireland was disproportionate, as one third of the population was dependent on the potato for a range of ethnic, religious, political, social, and economic reasons, such as land acquisition, absentee landlords, and the Corn Laws, which all contributed to the disaster to varying degrees and remain the subject of intense historical debate.

 

No, capitalism is not the same as a free market. Capitalism is all about monopolizing land – via government created and enforced privilege – so that those who are left landless can be exploited. I strongly support free markets, but I despise capitalism.

 

People are forced to pay landowners rent. Landownership is a privilege created and enforced by government, so that idle landowners can get rich by exploiting the landless.

Nature created and provided the land for free. Landowners provide nothing.

Land is not privately owned in China. So China is obviously not capitalistic. China is benefiting from more freedom in their markets (free markets) but that is not the same as capitalism.

 

The land in Ireland was privately owned which is the main basis of capitalism. The landowners took the food that the peasants produced, without returning anything at all, leaving the peasants to starve to death. This is what pure capitalism does and it is also why no nation practices pure capitalism anymore, because pure capitalism is destructive and evil.

 

dear, why make stuff up and look goofy? You could say capitalism is all about murder or eating ice cream. Here are 3 definitions to help you get started in reality:

cap·i·tal·ism/ˈkapədlˌizəm/
noun
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Capitalism | Definition of Capitalism by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism‎
Full Definition of capitalism. : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.


Capitalism | Define Capitalism at Dictionary.com
www.dictionary.com/browse/capitalism‎
noun. 1. an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth. Origin of capitalism Expand.

 

why make stuff and look goofy???

Chinese property law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_property_law‎
Ownership rights. Ownership rights are protected under Article 39 of The Property Law of the People's Republic of China, which gives the owner the right to possess, utilize, dispose of and obtain profits from the real property.

 

its like saying farmers or manufactures provide nothing. Very stupid; even perfectly stupid . Try manufacturing or farming without land.

 

1) ownership of land cars machines houses anda private property in general etc is a natural right given to us by God and secured by our Constitution.

2) if you could get be idle and get rich with land, more than with other stuff, everyone would want to buy land and the price would go up until to was no longer worth owning. Econ 101 class day one. Sorry to rock your world.

 

The only stupid thing is you trying to pretend that the landowner provides the land when we all know that nature provided the land for free. That is why land is called a NATURAL RESOURCE. Free markets cannot exist alongside a parasitic landowning class and that is why the founding fathers placed all taxation on land values in the original Constitution of the United States.

 

dear, nature may have originally provided it for free but nature did not distribute it for free or at all. On day one animals and humans claimed land as their own much the way we do today under capitalism. Capitalism is the perfect mechanism for distribution of land or oil or autos or food. Do you understand? Do you know why East Germany did worse than West Germany or why Florida does far better than Cuba or why China was able to eliminate 40% of the world's poverty the instant it switched to private ownership and distribution?? Isn't thinking fun?

 

Landownership is purely a government created and enforced privilege.

"A right of property in movable things is admitted before the establishment of government. A separate property in lands not till after that establishment.... He who plants a field keeps possession of it till he has gathered the produce, after which one has as good a right as another to occupy it. Government must be established and laws provided, before lands can be separately appropriated and their owner protected in his possession. Till then the property is in the body of the nation." --Thomas Jefferson

 

so is the ownership of everything!! So?????????????????

 

You don't know what legal privilege is. Privilege is an increase in an individuals rights at the expense of the rights of others. Ownership of the products of labor are not a privilege because that type of ownership does not deprive others of their rights or what they would have otherwise had.

“From its Latin origin, a privilege is a "private law," a law with someone's name on it, a law that permits someone to do what others may not do. We should agree to eschew privilege”. – Nic Tideman

“Seems to me that a “right” is something everyone should have, like life, liberty, free speech, rewards of working and saving. A privilege is something A can only have by depriving B et al. Those with privileges have sought to expand the meaning of “right” to include their privileges”— Mason Gaffney

 

and thanks to capitalism everyone has a right to buy and sell land food houses toys cars etc etc. And?????

also land is trivial anyway. Japan has little land but great wealth for everyone. Wealth comes from capitalism not from giving away land as welfare.

 

and deduct the cost of operating the business from the cost of making the stupid widget and the owner made very little profit...so they are still using these examples to teach in schools today?..they were wrong 40 years ago..you would think they would understand reality by now...you do know what cost the business needs to deduct I hope?..

 

yes not only are their many costs to deduct but if in the end an owner gets a big profit the competition will swoop in to try to get some of it for themselves until it is reduced to $0. Capitalism is always reducing profits to $0.

 

no it is not..its about selling the product and making a profit..so to make a larger profit you must sell more goods..which will increase your overhead and you make less per item..but you always try to expand and sell more...and more more products and other goods to sell....and the first employee that complains is the first one out the door that day...just don't let the door hit him where the good lord split him

 

you hope its about that but in reality its a dynamic process in which capitalism is always reducing profits to $0 thus insuring distribution of wealth as widely as possible

 

i could see you don;t own a business..which I do..and ..and i have to make a profit every year to keep it going or i would be flipping burgers for $9.00 an hour...

 

not sure what I said with which you disagree??

 

While this is true of free markets it is not true to capitalism, because capitalism monopolizes land. When you are speaking of the products of labor (not land) then competition can come in and increase supply, which erodes profits. Land is fixed in supply so competition cannot erode profits, there is no competition. This is why I support shifting all taxation onto land values. The land value tax brings competition into the land market by breaking the monopoly current owners have over natural resources. Plus it creates a system where you get something of tangible and exchangeable value in return for the taxes you pay … pay your taxes and get valuable land in return. I believe that you should get something of tangible and exchangeable value in return for paying taxes. A land value tax can make that happen, because protecting your exclusive use or occupation of a parcel of land is a service that government can and does provide.

 

How do you see 'capitalism' reducing profits to $0?

 

It never actually reduces profits to $0, but the tendency of competition is to spread profits out among competing firms. Great profits are unnatural in genuine free markets, because they are signals to entrepreneurs what to invest in, and invite competition.

 

Owning land does not necessarily provide the owner a profit.

We already have property taxes, which requires landowners to perpetually have a source of income adequate to pay the taxes necessary to retain the land they own? or lose it. Government, in reality owns all the land, as by law the government can appropriate any property, and has exercised that power more than once.